Chandler v. Riggs

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Chandler v. Riggs

3 Ky. Op. 77, 1868 Ky. LEXIS 261

DecidedDecember 22, 1868

StatusPublished

This text of 3 Ky. Op. 77 (Chandler v. Riggs) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chandler v. Riggs, 3 Ky. Op. 77, 1868 Ky. LEXIS 261 (Ky. Ct. App. 1868).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Peters:

Appellant in his answer and cross-petition avers that the superior title to the land was in Briggs and wife, and not in his vendor; but he does not allege that he entered under Gist & Co., nor that he had made valuable, and lasting improvements on the land and does not ask for compensation for any amelioration of the land if he was never in possession thereof, and actually made such; consequently in the opinion and mandate of this court, appellees having- shown themselves entitled to the land directed a judgment to be rendered therefor pretermitting any compensation for improvements. The court below on the return of the cause rendered judgment in conformity to said opinion and mandate, by which the question now raised was concluded, and this court has no -legal power to modify, or change, the same.

Wherefore the judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Peters:

Appellant in his answer and cross-petition avers that the superior title to the land was in Briggs and wife, and not in his vendor; but he does not allege that he entered under Gist & Co., nor that he had made valuable, and lasting improvements on the land and does not ask for compensation for any amelioration of the land if he was never in possession thereof, and actually made such; consequently in the opinion and mandate of this court, appellees having- shown themselves entitled to the land directed a judgment to be rendered therefor pretermitting any compensation for improvements. The court below on the return of the cause rendered judgment in conformity to said opinion and mandate, by which the question now raised was concluded, and this court has no -legal power to modify, or change, the same.

Wherefore the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 Ky. Op. 77, 1868 Ky. LEXIS 261, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chandler-v-riggs-kyctapp-1868.